re-posting this for reference.. #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..
#2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..
#3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..
The ONLY evidence that is necessary to prove common ancestry beyond all doubt is genetic.
This science was unknown to all the men and women who developed the idea of evolution by natural selection.
The entire edifice was rebuilt on a brand new foundation and it confirms that Darwin had been largely correct.
re-posting this for reference.. #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..
#2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..
#3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..
Ernst Haeckel was wrong about much of his hypothesis - but not entirely.
The fact of common ancestry in no way rests on his idea that phylogeny recapitulates ontogeny. This demonstrates your reliance on social 'science' rather than actual science.
re-posting this for reference.. #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..
#2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..
#3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..
EP - this thread is not about whether or not god exists. The vast majority of believers accept the fact of evolution. In the same way that accepting that the earth is not flat doesn't undermine faith for most people, only a few fundamentalists insist otherwise.
If you want to argue that god exists I am happy to engage on a different thread. If you want to debate the evidence for evolution then choose one of the 40 topics in the index on page 1 and tell me why it is wrong, or start a new thread on the subject. Please stop with the obnoxious preaching/trolling.
re-posting this for reference.. #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..
#2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..
#3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..
This is surely a parody of fundamentalist BS
re-posting this for reference.. #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..
#2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..
#3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..
I have a policy of never insulting people on this forum. Your arrogance and wilful ignorance makes it very difficult.
re-posting this for reference.. #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..
#2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..
#3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..
EP - Anthropology IS NOT the same as biological evolution.
The evidence that all living things descended from a common ancestor over millions of years is so conclusive that only religious ideologies reject it.
Everything that you have written so far suggests that you have not got the first clue. You mocked Nick Lane when he stated that our cellular respiration is more closely related to a mushroom than it is to bacteria. Why would you scoff at that if you have studied evolution? It is so fundamentally true it is not even controversial.
I was a JW creationist once. Since then I have spent countless hours studying the evidence and read literally dozens of books on paleontology, genetics, comparative anatomy, embryology and every creationist objection to science ever dreamed up. You might want to argue that I am wrong but you cannot argue that I am uninformed.
I am willing and ready to discuss the detailed evidence with you right now. Pick a thread from page 1 and tell me why it is wrong - and stop tha facile preaching.
By the way I'm still waiting to hear the title of even one single book that presents the evidence for evolution that you have actually read.
re-posting this for reference.. #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..
#2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..
#3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..
EP - I am not doubting your studies in anthropology. I don't know the syllabus of your course but you have demonstrated your total ignorance of biological evolution.
re-posting this for reference.. #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..
#2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..
#3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..
There is no way EP isn't a troll. Nobody can be that wilfully ignorant.
"molecules don't care about life.
" first part deals with abiogenesis and the state of current research.
second part stephen meyer proposes intelligent design as an explanation of some of the problems.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bss0rxpsbuq.
There are no books that present a scientific case for biological evolution
I just typed 'biological evolution evidence' into Google Scholar and got 3.73 million results.
Why should anybody take you seriously when you have not read a single word of the evidence that you arrogantly dismiss?
re-posting this for reference.. #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..
#2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..
#3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..
Our genome shows that our creator used similar types of code in different organisms He created
Actually no it doesn't show any such thing.
Imagine you are a teacher and you suspect that some of your pupils have been copying each other's essays. When you challenge them they claim that they are innocent and the similarities only show that they all used the same sources for their research.
How would you show beyond all doubt that one or more of them had in fact been cheating?
(PS - cut down on the personal insults and stick to facts please)
